Megan's Law consistency

With the 1996 Megan's Law, New Jersey was in the vanguard of states dealing with sex offenders who prey on children. The law's intention was to arm the public with information about where those predators live and just how dangerous they are.
The concept was simple, but the execution has proved complicated, resulting in an uneven application of the law's provisions. A bipartisan legislative committee is now reviewing the law to see what works and what doesn't.
Prominent on the committee's agenda is examining whether a statewide, uniform process for classifying offenders is needed. We think it is.

Judges, prosecutors and lawyers in each county determine whether an offender poses a low, moderate or high risk to the community. Those deemed the highest risk are listed on the state's Web site, and police, school administrators, neighbors and others are notified. With tier-two offenders, police and schools are told but neighbors aren't. The names can be placed on the Web site. With tier-one offenders, only the police are informed and offenders' names do not go on the site.
None of these classifications is well-defined, though, and that has resulted in variations from county to county. An offender considered a low risk in one county may be tier two in another. A 2005 Star-Ledger comparison found, for example, that in Essex County, one in 10 offenders -- a wildly disproportionate number -- was labeled a high risk, while in Middlesex, Somerset and Warren counties, one in 100 was considered dangerous.
A statewide system that uses a permanent panel to review each case and make a determination about who poses a high, moderate or low risk according to a standardized set of criteria would provide a consistency now lacking.
But some on the committee are suggesting it should consider other changes.
For example, the Web site lists only the most serious offenders and those considered most likely to be repeat offenders. Of the estimated 12,000 Megan's Law offenders in the state, only 2,482 are on the State Police list. At least 20 other states post every name, but many do not use the tier-rating system. Would the public be better served with a listing of all offenders and a brief description of their crimes but no ranking of their risk?
The effectiveness of the Megan's Law Web site is limited. It provides information, but it also can create a false sense of security for parents who check it and find no offenders in their neighborhood. Would the list be different if they lived in a neighboring county? Parents shouldn't have to wonder about such things.